11/21/1989 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 11/21/89 -2- Law Director Gareau reported: 1) City of North Olmsted had an adverse ruling with respect to the private detective case. City requires anyone who is a private detective or security guard to register with the city. They are not licensed; city just wants to know where they are. In conjunction with register- ing, there is a $10 fee used to process the applications. State legislature, several years ago, indicated that the city could collect the information but could not charge a fee. Law Director believes this is unconstitutional; the state does not have the right to tell North Olmsted that it cannot charge a processing fee when it costs that amount of money. City was sued and proceeded to file a counter-suit claiming it was unconstitutional; both parties then filed motions for summary judgment and they won. Unless there is a strenuous objection from council, Law Director Gareau plans to file an appeal in the Eighth Appellate District Court; it will not cost the city anything. This deals with an issue of local self-government which everyone should strive to protect. Believes the state legislature went a touch overboard when it said the city could not charge a fee although it could collect the information. 2) With respect to the Cooper Case, where a trailer came loose from the back of a city service truck and hit a car, has been trying to settle. The case is now in court; depositions were taken last week; Law Director is still looking to settle. 3) Regarding the EPA tap-in ban., has filed a notice of appeal and also has filed a request for a stay of execution on the ban. This was filed last Friday and the EPA has three days within which to respond; they have to respond by tomorrow. The Environmental Board of Review has established next Thursday as the date for this issue to come to a hearing. At the Thursday meeting, will look at the issues involved relative to the tap-in ban. Will also take a deposition of a local EPA official for this coming Friday. There has been some communication with the Attorney General's off ice; they are fighting the taking of that deposition. Hopefully, the city will be permitted to take a deposition of that official, if not Friday, perhaps Monday, so the city can learn what motivated the local EPA to make a recommendation to Columbus to issue a ban when they did absolutely nothing as far as looking into the background of this matter. It was based on six letters of complaint. that emanated from the May 26th storm. 4) Has received sixty-two pages of documents that are going to be filed in Federal Court tomorrow morning by an organization known as The Building Industry Association of Greater Cleveland and Surrounding Areas.. They are suing the City of North Olmsted and the EPA relative to the tap-in ban. Most of the operative language of the complaint, in their motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary in- junction, deals with the abusive conduct of the EPA. There are no operative facts in the complaint that indicate the City of North Olmsted did anything wrong except to refuse to issue a permit, which the city was prohibited from doing by the EPA. Will be in Federal Court next week and in Columbus before the Environmental Board of Review. 5) Several months ago, Law Director forwarded a letter from attorney Mike Gavin, regarding the Georgalis property, to council. This was in reference to their request for rezoning; suggests this issue be taken up before the BZD Committee; will be happy to meet with committee to discuss the merits of this potential ]_aw suit . Finance Director Boyle reported: 1) Has received revised copies of the new amended certificate for 1990, which will be distributed tomorrow. City will re- ceive $6,016,524 in property taxes next year based on $429,751,668 of assessed valuation; will be able to spend $24,502,724 based on the amended certificate. This does not include a $50,000 transfer from General Fund to Insurance Loss Reserve, which was in the budget, nor the bonding of the Industrial Park. This is on notes right now and will go to bond probably the early part of next year; it is another $1,025,000 and is a special assessment.